Advertisement
Supported by
Whether it is over TikTok, fentanyl or trade, Beijing might welcome a compromise to buy time to address its ailing economy and bolster its position globally.
By David Pierson
Reporting from Hong Kong
As for the early Salvos, President Donald J. Trump’s risk of a 10% tariff on Chinese goods in retaliation for China’s role in the U. S. fentanyl crisis can be interpreted in Beijing as encouraging.
Those tasks are not only less than the 60 cents in line with the price lists that Trump had announced he would tax Chinese commodities during his campaign, but they also reinforced signs that the president was in the mood to negotiate with China. Trump’s first two days in office also floated the concept of tying price lists to the fate of TikTok. He said he hoped to be invited to visit China.
The obvious will of Trump to reach the attack agreements with China can give Beijing the time and the area that he wants to fulfill his maximum urgent wishes. This includes seeking to change a stagnant economy and facilitate tensions with commercial partners on the surplus of China’s record industry almost almost. $ 1 billion. Beijing is also running to restore ties with American allies such as Japan in an attempt to weaken safety alliances forged through Biden management to coercion China.
Making progress on those fronts will help China improve its standing in what has been a punitive superpower rivalry with the United States. In the end, Beijing, Trump’s administration will fix relations. He argued that the United States deserves to remove restrictions on Sino-American imports of U. S. technology, prevent support for Taiwan, the self-governing island claimed through Beijing, and settle for China as its counterpart power.
Beijing can calculate that it can appease Trump with a sale of Tiktok, an offensive against fentanyl precursors manufacturers or an update of the M. Trump industry agreement and the first Chinese leader of China, Xi Jinping, signed in 2020, they said analysts .
“From an economic perspective, it’d be in Washington’s and Beijing’s interests to come up with some kind of a pseudo grand bargain that met both sides’ immediate political needs without sacrificing too much,” said Scott Kennedy of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
We are having to recover the content of the article.
Allow JavaScript in the configuration of your browser.
Thanks for your patience while we determine access. If you are in a player mode, leave and log in to your Times account or subscribe to all the time.
Thanks for your patience while we check access.
Already a subscriber? Sign in.
Do you want all the time? Subscribe.
Advertisement